Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi.
Credit: PTI File Photo
Amid reports of an 'offer' by a saffron outfit to the Gyanvapi Mosque Committee to consider settling the dispute out of the court, the lawyer for the Hindu plaintiffs Vishnu Shankar Jain on Thursday rejected settling the matter through negotiations saying that the followers of the ''Sanatan Dharma'' would not 'relinquish' their claim on ''even an inch'' of the land in the Mosque premises.
Jain's remarks came after the president of saffron outfit Vishwa Vedic Sanatan Sangh Jitendra Singh Bisen sent a letter to the Anjuman Intezamia Mosque Committee, which looked after the Gyanvapi Mosque, to 'settle' the dispute of the court. The Mosque Committee assured that it would consider the offer.
''I want to state clearly...the followers of the Sanatan Dharma will never agree to withdraw their claim on even inch of the land...the only way possible for the Muslim litigants is to tender an apology and withdraw their claim on the Mosque,'' Jain said in a Tweet.
Jain also said that the letter in question had no legal value. ''As per the law an out of court settlement is possible only when all sides agree to it,'' he added.
The remarks came at a time when the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) was conducting a scientific survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque premises on the direction of the court.
Earlier Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath had also asked the Muslim community to ''correct the historical mistakes''.
''There will be a dispute if I call Gyanvapi a mosque....those who have been given sight by the God should see....what's a trident doing inside a mosque?.....we didn't keep it there...the walls (of Gyanvapi) are creaming....there is Jyotirlinga, there are many idols,'' the chief minister had said.
Adityanath also said that a proposal should be made from the Muslim community that a ''historical mistake'' had been committed and that it should be 'corrected'.
The premises had been a bone of contention between the two communities for the past several decades but there was renewed clamor to ''take back'' the Kashi Vishwanath Temple premises by the saffron outfits after the favourable decision of the apex court in the Ram Temple case.
The Hindu petitioners contended that a part of the temple had been demolished by the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb in the 17th century. The Muslim side contended that the Mosque existed before the reign of Aurangzeb and also claimed that the same had also been mentioned in the land records.